On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Adrian Chadd <adr...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 7 September 2013 12:56, Ian Lepore <i...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > >> I think the part of this that strikes me as strange is calling 20% of >> physical memory used for network buffers a "very low value". It seems >> outrageously high to me. I'd be pissed if that much memory got wasted >> on network buffers on one of our $work platforms with so little memory. >> >> So the fact that you think it's crazy-low and I think it's crazy-high >> may be a sign that it's auto-tuned to a reasonable compromise, and in >> both our cases the right fix would be to use the available knobs to tune >> things for our particular uses. >> > > Well, which limit is actually being hit here? 20% of 32mb is still a lot > of memory buffers.. > > Now, for sizing up the needed buffers for wifi: > > assuming 512 tx, 512 rx buffers for two ath NICs. > > another 512+512 buffers for each arge NICs. > > So, 4096 mbufs here, 2k each, so ~ 8mb of RAM. > And we are only getting 6mb of maxmbufmem with current setup. Index: mips/include/vmparam.h =================================================================== --- mips/include/vmparam.h (revision 255320) +++ mips/include/vmparam.h (working copy) @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ * is the total KVA space allocated for kmem_map. */ #ifndef VM_KMEM_SIZE_SCALE -#define VM_KMEM_SIZE_SCALE (3) +#define VM_KMEM_SIZE_SCALE (1) #endif /* As I mentioned on another reply in the same thread, VM_KMEM_SIZE_SCALE is 1 for amd64. If I do the same for mips as above, we get # sysctl -a | grep maxmbuf kern.ipc.maxmbufmem: 14407680 Now, do we want to have this much rams assigned to mbufs is another question. cheers, Hiren _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
